Monday, April 05, 2010
Federal Californication
Yes, I know I'm a fanatic with the economy that should probably lighten up, but where the "recovery" is concerned, folks should beware of the fact that most of the "recovery" happening in the Obama administration is California-esque stealing from the future, and not a true recovery.
9 comments:
Out of curiosity, how far does this data go back? What does it look like in previous recessions and during the great depression as well as WWII when there was a lot of debt to finance public works / war? I suspect that in these events the GDP didn't decrease as much against the deficit spending, but it would be interesting to see.
I agree. IF they kept track (and I wouldn't have put it past FDRs guys to have purposefully not done so, given some of the shenanigans that went on), it would give us a better perspective.
This graph doesn't show it, but WWII was another HUGE negative GDP event, but it was one we recovered from pretty quickly because we still had a manufacturing base and all our competitors had been bombed flat. Since the (um... let's call it:) mid sixties or so our real GDP has been declining as both our borrowing and our cost of refi'ing previous borrowing eat erode the fruits of current production.
You mean the actual GDP (red line) has been decreasing since since the 60s? But I thought that was our industrial heyday so wouldn't it have increased? Certainly I can see that our actual GDP has been in decline since the 90s when outsourcing of the manufacturing base began and we moved to a service economy since the value of that service economy is so subjective and intangible.
I think I need to know better what the Y axis is here. % of what makes up the Y axis? % relative to another percentage, or against the median over the past 100 years? I'm missing something now.
red line -- debt adjusted GDP.
Normally government spending is included in GDP, but the GDP number does not take into account how much of that spending was taken from future production (and hence not really part of GDP) and how much was taken (taxed) from current production.
Also, remember the parenthetical "fudge" from my comment -- I'm not willing to sign on the dotted line for exact time-frame, as I don't produce these combination-charts so I only see them when another kurmudgeon puts one up. (But the uncombined data's available from BLS and the Fed if you want to do the leg-work.)
Thanks for the clarification on where the data comes from. Probably do need to go figure out what exactly that Y axis means to better understand this. My scientician-sense is telling me something isn't quite right here...maybe not as bad as it's portrayed, but seeing a prolonged GDP loss since the 60s definitely is more alarming than I expected.
Knowing the source, I suspect the Y axis is YoY growth, but this chart is only good from 1995. More digging if you want broader-ranged data...
post something, dammit. :)
watch vaiana online
watch anchorman online free
watch black panther online free
watch vaiana online
Post a Comment